Superior immunogenicity of mRNA over adenoviral vectored COVID-19 vaccines reflects B cell dynamics independent of anti-vector immunity: Implications for future pandemic vaccines.

Both vector and mRNA vaccines were an important part of the response to the COVID-19 pandemic and may be required in future outbreaks and pandemics. The aim of this study was to validate whether immunogenicity differs for adenoviral vectored (AdV) versus mRNA vaccines against SARS-CoV-2, and to investigate how anti-vector immunity and B cell dynamics modulate immunogenicity. We enrolled SARS-CoV-2 infection-naïve health care workers who had received two doses of either AdV AZD1222 (n = 184) or mRNA BNT162b2 vaccine (n = 274) between April and October 2021. Blood was collected at least once, 10-48 days after vaccine dose 2 for antibody and B cell analyses. Median ages were 42 and 39 years, for AdV and mRNA vaccinees, respectively. Surrogate virus neutralization test (sVNT) and spike binding antibody titres were a median of 4.2 and 2.2 times lower, respectively, for AdV compared to mRNA vaccinees (p < 0.001). Median percentages of memory B cells that recognized fluorescent-tagged spike and RBD were 2.9 and 8.3 times lower, respectively for AdV compared to mRNA vaccinees. Titres of IgG reactive with human adenovirus type 5 hexon protein rose a median of 2.2-fold after AdV vaccination but were not correlated with anti-spike antibody titres. Together the results show that mRNA induced substantially more sVNT antibody than AdV vaccine, which reflected greater B cell expansion and targeting of the RBD rather than an attenuating effect of anti-vector antibodies. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05110911.

The need for a clinical case definition in test-negative design studies estimating vaccine effectiveness.

Test negative studies have been used extensively for the estimation of COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE). Such studies are able to estimate VE against medically-attended illness under certain assumptions. Selection bias may be present if the probability of participation is associated with vaccination or COVID-19, but this can be mitigated through use of a clinical case definition to screen patients for eligibility, which increases the likelihood that cases and non-cases come from the same source population. We examined the extent to which this type of bias could harm COVID-19 VE through systematic review and simulation. A systematic review of test-negative studies was re-analysed to identify studies ignoring the need for clinical criteria. Studies using a clinical case definition had a lower pooled VE estimate compared with studies that did not. Simulations varied the probability of selection by case and vaccination status. Positive bias away from the null (i.e., inflated VE consistent with the systematic review) was observed when there was a higher proportion of healthy, vaccinated non-cases, which may occur if a dataset contains many results from asymptomatic screening in settings where vaccination coverage is high. We provide an html tool for researchers to explore site-specific sources of selection bias in their own studies. We recommend all groups consider the potential for selection bias in their vaccine effectiveness studies, particularly when using administrative data.

Comparative B cell and antibody responses induced by adenoviral vectored and mRNA vaccines against COVID-19.

Both vector and mRNA vaccines were an important part of the response to the COVID-19 pandemic and may be required in future outbreaks and pandemics. However, adenoviral vectored (AdV) vaccines may be less immunogenic than mRNA vaccines against SARS-CoV-2. We assessed anti-spike and anti-vector immunity among infection-naïve Health Care Workers (HCW) following two doses of AdV (AZD1222) versus mRNA (BNT162b2) vaccine. 183 AdV and 274 mRNA vaccinees enrolled between April and October 2021. Median ages were 42 and 39 years, respectively. Blood was collected at least once, 10-48 days after vaccine dose 2. Surrogate virus neutralization test (sVNT) and spike binding antibody titres were a median of 4.2 and 2.2 times lower, respectively, for AdV compared to mRNA vaccinees (p<0.001). Median percentages of memory B cells that recognized fluorescent-tagged spike and RBD were 2.9 and 8.3 times lower, respectively for AdV compared to mRNA vaccinees. Titres of IgG reactive with human Adenovirus type 5 hexon protein rose a median of 2.2-fold after AdV vaccination but were not correlated with anti-spike antibody titres. Together the results show that mRNA induced substantially more sVNT antibody than AdV vaccine due to greater B cell expansion and targeting of the RBD. Pre-existing AdV vector cross-reactive antibodies were boosted following AdV vaccination but had no detectable effect on immunogenicity.

Revisiting assumptions in test-negative studies for estimating vaccine effectiveness: the need for a clinical case definition.

Test negative studies have been used extensively for the estimation of COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE). Such studies are able to estimate VE against medically-attended illness under certain assumptions. Selection bias may be present if the probability of participation is associated with vaccination or COVID-19, but this can be mitigated through use of a clinical case definition to screen patients for eligibility, which increases the likelihood that cases and non-cases come from the same source population. We examined the extent to which this type of bias could harm COVID-19 VE through systematic review and simulation. A systematic review of test-negative studies was re-analysed to identify studies ignoring the need for clinical criteria. Studies using a clinical case definition had a lower pooled VE estimate compared with studies that did not. Simulations varied the probability of selection by case and vaccination status. Positive bias away from the null (i.e., inflated VE consistent with the systematic review) was observed when there was a higher proportion of healthy, vaccinated non-cases, which may occur if a dataset contains many results from asymptomatic screening in settings where vaccination coverage is high. We provide an html tool for researchers to explore site-specific sources of selection bias in their own studies. We recommend all group consider the potential for selection bias in their vaccine effectiveness studies, particularly when using administrative data.

Human seasonal influenza under COVID-19 and the potential consequences of influenza lineage elimination.

Annual epidemics of seasonal influenza cause hundreds of thousands of deaths, high levels of morbidity, and substantial economic loss. Yet, global influenza circulation has been heavily suppressed by public health measures and travel restrictions since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Notably, the influenza B/Yamagata lineage has not been conclusively detected since April 2020, and A(H3N2), A(H1N1), and B/Victoria viruses have since circulated with considerably less genetic diversity. Travel restrictions have largely confined regional outbreaks of A(H3N2) to South and Southeast Asia, B/Victoria to China, and A(H1N1) to West Africa. Seasonal influenza transmission lineages continue to perish globally, except in these select hotspots, which will likely seed future epidemics. Waning population immunity and sporadic case detection will further challenge influenza vaccine strain selection and epidemic control. We offer a perspective on the potential short- and long-term evolutionary dynamics of seasonal influenza and discuss potential consequences and mitigation strategies as global travel gradually returns to pre-pandemic levels.

Opposing Effects of Prior Infection versus Prior Vaccination on Vaccine Immunogenicity against Influenza A(H3N2) Viruses.

Prior vaccination can alternately enhance or attenuate influenza vaccine immunogenicity and effectiveness. Analogously, we found that vaccine immunogenicity was enhanced by prior A(H3N2) virus infection among participants of the Ha Nam Cohort, Viet Nam, but was attenuated by prior vaccination among Australian Health Care Workers (HCWs) vaccinated in the same year. Here, we combined these studies to directly compare antibody titers against 35 A(H3N2) viruses spanning 1968-2018. Participants received licensed inactivated vaccines containing A/HongKong/4801/2014 (H3N2). The analysis was limited to participants aged 18-65 Y, and compared those exposed to A(H3N2) viruses circulating since 2009 by infection (Ha Nam) or vaccination (HCWs) to a reference group who had no recent A(H3N2) infection or vaccination (Ha Nam). Antibody responses were compared by fitting titer/titer-rise landscapes across strains, and by estimating titer ratios to the reference group of 2009-2018 viruses. Pre-vaccination, titers were lowest against 2009-2014 viruses among the reference (no recent exposure) group. Post-vaccination, titers were, on average, two-fold higher among participants with prior infection and two-fold lower among participants with 3-5 prior vaccinations compared to the reference group. Titer rise was negligible among participants with 3-5 prior vaccinations, poor among participants with 1-2 prior vaccinations, and equivalent or better among those with prior infection compared to the reference group. The enhancing effect of prior infection versus the incrementally attenuating effect of prior vaccinations suggests that these exposures may alternately promote and constrain the generation of memory that can be recalled by a new vaccine strain.

Influenza virus infection history shapes antibody responses to influenza vaccination.

Studies of successive vaccination suggest that immunological memory against past influenza viruses may limit responses to vaccines containing current strains. The impact of memory induced by prior infection is rarely considered and is difficult to ascertain, because infections are often subclinical. This study investigated influenza vaccination among adults from the Ha Nam cohort (Vietnam), who were purposefully selected to include 72 with and 28 without documented influenza A(H3N2) infection during the preceding 9 years (Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry 12621000110886). The primary outcome was the effect of prior influenza A(H3N2) infection on hemagglutinin-inhibiting antibody responses induced by a locally available influenza vaccine administered in November 2016. Baseline and postvaccination sera were titrated against 40 influenza A(H3N2) strains spanning 1968-2018. At each time point (baseline, day 14 and day 280), geometric mean antibody titers against 2008-2018 strains were higher among participants with recent infection (34 (29-40), 187 (154-227) and 86 (72-103)) than among participants without recent infection (19 (17-22), 91 (64-130) and 38 (30-49)). On days 14 and 280, mean titer rises against 2014-2018 strains were 6.1-fold (5.0- to 7.4-fold) and 2.6-fold (2.2- to 3.1-fold) for participants with recent infection versus 4.8-fold (3.5- to 6.7-fold) and 1.9-fold (1.5- to 2.3-fold) for those without. One of 72 vaccinees with recent infection versus 4 of 28 without developed symptomatic A(H3N2) infection in the season after vaccination (P = 0.021). The range of A(H3N2) viruses recognized by vaccine-induced antibodies was associated with the prior infection strain. These results suggest that recall of immunological memory induced by prior infection enhances antibody responses to inactivated influenza vaccine and is important to attain protective antibody titers.

Influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 But Not A(H3N2) Virus Infection Induces Durable Seroprotection: Results From the Ha Nam Cohort.

BACKGROUND: The extent to which influenza recurrence depends upon waning immunity from prior infection is undefined. We used antibody titers of Ha-Nam cohort participants to estimate protection curves and decay trajectories. METHODS: Households (270) participated in influenza-like-illness (ILI) surveillance and provided blood at intervals spanning laboratory-confirmed virus transmission. Sera were tested in hemagglutination inhibition assay. Infection was defined as influenza virus-positive ILI and/or seroconversion. Median protective titers were estimated using scaled-logistic regression to model pretransmission titer against infection status in that season, limiting analysis to households with infection(s). Titers were modelled against month since infection using mixed-effects linear regression to estimate decay and when titers fell below protection thresholds. RESULTS: From December 2008-2012, 295 and 314 participants were infected with H1N1pdm09-like and A/Perth/16/09-like (H3N2Pe09) viruses, respectively. The proportion protected rose more steeply with titer for H1N1pdm09 than for H3N2Pe09, and estimated 50% protection titers were 19.6 and 37.3, respectively. Postinfection titers started higher against H3N2Pe09 but decayed more steeply than against H1N1pdm09. Seroprotection was estimated to be sustained against H1N1pdm09 but to wane by 8-months for H3N2Pe09. CONCLUSIONS: Estimates indicate that infection induces durable seroprotection against H1N1pdm09 but not H3N2Pe09, which could in part account for the younger age of A(H1N1) versus A(H3N2) cases.

Evaluation of 6 Commercial SARS-CoV-2 Serology Assays Detecting Different Antibodies for Clinical Testing and Serosurveillance.

BACKGROUND: Serological testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) complements nucleic acid tests for patient diagnosis and enables monitoring of population susceptibility to inform the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic response. It is important to understand the reliability of assays with different antigen or antibody targets to detect humoral immunity after SARS-CoV-2 infection and to understand how antibody (Ab) binding assays compare to those detecting neutralizing antibody (nAb), particularly as we move into the era of vaccines. METHODS: We evaluated the performance of 6 commercially available enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs), including a surrogate virus neutralization test (sVNT), for detection of SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulins (IgA, IgM, IgG), total or nAb. A result subset was compared with a cell culture-based microneutralization (MN) assay. We tested sera from patients with prior reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, prepandemic sera, and potential cross-reactive sera from patients with other non-COVID-19 acute infections. RESULTS: For sera collected >14 days post-symptom onset, the assay achieving the highest sensitivity was the Wantai total Ab at 100% (95% CI, 94.6%-100%), followed by 93.1% for Euroimmun NCP-IgG, 93.1% for GenScript sVNT, 90.3% for Euroimmun S1-IgG, 88.9% for Euroimmun S1-IgA, and 83.3% for Wantai IgM. Specificity for the best-performing assay was 99.5% for the Wantai total Ab, and for the lowest-performing assay it was 97.1% for sVNT (as per the Instructions for Use [IFU]). The Wantai Total Ab had the best agreement with MN at 98% followed by Euroimmun S1-IgA, Euro NCP-IgG, and sVNT (as per IFU) with 97%, 97% and 95%, respectively; Wantai IgM had the poorest agreement at 93%. CONCLUSIONS: Performance characteristics of the SARS-CoV-2 serology assays detecting different antibody types are consistent with those found in previously published reports. Evaluation of the surrogate virus neutralization test in comparison to the Ab binding assays and a cell culture-based neutralization assay showed good result correlation between all assays. However, correlation between the cell-based neutralization test and some assays detecting Ab's not specifically involved in neutralization was higher than with the sVNT. This study demonstrates the reliability of different assays to detect the humoral immune response following SARS-CoV-2 infection, which can be used to optimize serological test algorithms for assessing antibody responses post-SARS-CoV-2 infection or vaccination.

A Randomized Trial of Two 2-Dose Influenza Vaccination Strategies for Patients Following Autologous Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Seroprotection and seroconversion rates are not well understood for 2-dose inactivated influenza vaccination (IIV) schedules in autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (autoHCT) patients. METHODS: A randomized, single-blind, controlled trial of IIV in autoHCT patients in their first year post-transplant was conducted. Patients were randomized 1:1 to high-dose (HD) IIV followed by standard dose (SD) vaccine (HD-SD arm) or 2 SD vaccines (SD-SD arm) 4 weeks apart. Hemagglutination inhibition (HI) assay for IIV strains was performed at baseline, 1, 2, and 6 months post-first dose. Evaluable primary outcomes were seroprotection (HI titer ≥40) and seroconversion (4-fold titer increase) rates and secondary outcomes were geometric mean titers (GMTs), GMT ratios (GMRs), adverse events, influenza-like illness (ILI), and laboratory-confirmed influenza (LCI) rates and factors associated with seroconversion. RESULTS: Sixty-eight patients were enrolled (34/arm) with median age of 61.5 years, majority male (68%) with myeloma (68%). Median time from autoHCT to vaccination was 2.3 months. For HD-SD and SD-SD arms, percentages of patients achieving seroprotection were 75.8% and 79.4% for H1N1, 84.9% and 88.2% for H3N2 (all P > .05), and 78.8% and 97.1% for influenza-B/Yamagata (P = .03), respectively. Seroconversion rates, GMTs and GMRs, and number of ILI or LCIs were not significantly different between arms. Adverse event rates were similar. Receipt of concurrent cancer therapy was independently associated with higher odds of seroconversion (OR, 4.3; 95% CI, 1.2-14.9; P = .02). CONCLUSIONS: High seroprotection and seroconversion rates against all influenza strains can be achieved with vaccination as early as 2 months post-autoHCT with either 2-dose vaccine schedules. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: ACTRN12619000617167.